Dear Bro. Jo,
I am wondering; is it too prudish for a YSA to not want to date someone seriously if they aren't a virgin?
Even if it was something in their past that they have cleared up?
Jack
Dear Jack,
I think that's a tough line to draw.
Unless we have Spiritual Stewardship over them, it's really none of our business whether or not someone has repented, or "cleared things up".
They also shouldn't be advertising past transgressions. It really seems inappropriate to me when people do that.
So I don't know how you know what you know, whether or not you really know what you think you do, or are just asking a philosophical question . . .
I do know that I wouldn't use the word "prudish". "Self-righteous" might be better . . .
I also understand the desire to marry someone who has held high enough standards and lived those standards when it comes to saving sex for marriage. Despite what the world and many people in it say, it IS a big deal. (So is knowing that the person you're having sex with has no possibility of a transmitted disease and can never . . . "compare" . . . you to any former sex partners. I think those things are a pretty big deal, too.)
I guess my final answer is this: if it's something that doesn't bother you then go ahead and date them; if it’s not something you can live with, then don't.
Perhaps the circumstances of their past will sway you one direction or another; would we view a former porn star in the same light as someone who was pressured to do something dumb one time when they were young?
I mean, repentance is repentance . . . but not all things are equal, you know?
And then there's the principle of "planned repentance not really being repentance". That's where someone sins with the thought that they'll simply quit later and "repent" . . . that ain't the same. If you don't regret what you've done (I believe President Kimball called it "Godly Sorrow") then you really haven't turned away . . .
Regardless of your choice, I think you should keep it between yourself and the Lord. Maybe that's the part of this that's bothering me the most . . . the "how do you know?" part. I might look at this situation one way if this person is constantly bragging or telling stories about their indiscretions (drives me CRAZY when people in the Church try to portray themselves as "cool" because they were "rebellious" when they were young . . . who are they trying to impress???), and I might look at it another way if this is information you have because a good friend felt the need to confide in you . . .
See the difference?
Humility, while it escapes me more often than it should, is something I really admire.
- Bro Jo
6 comments:
I will be completely honest that question should not be asked even at all. There is only 1 question you should consider, "Is this person currently active and worthy to make or keep covenants in the temple?" If the answer is no then let them work those things out first. If the answer is yes then it should NOT matter whatsoever. By making it an issue you are basically saying that God and his servants (the Bishop and Stake President) are wrong and are denying them atonement. If they have repented and are living worthy of the gospel then their past problems are just that, the past. I even disagree with Bro Jo about the porn star thing. If the person was maybe very sexually active but then learned about the church and promptly repented and changed their ways then it should not matter. If they are a worthy active member of the church then dating them should only come with one other question and that is "Is there a child involved?" If they do have a child then it is up to whether or not you feel up to possibly being a step parent and that is an individual choice. If they don't then it's back to the original answer, it shouldn't matter.
The only difference it should make is IF after dating a while and your relationship gets tot he point of discussing marriage then you should have a discussion about testing for STD's before marriage and following up with a doctor to make sure that IF they have any they won't spread to you. (Also if you are female you should get the HPV vaccine as a precaution).
Before one gets married one has the Right AND Responsibility to know the sexual history of their future spouse.
Not the Gory Graphic Details, but certainly the Who, Why, Where, and How Often.
This is not a question of repentance or judgement or worthiness: this is about Trust and Honesty and Virtue.
All actions have consequences, be they good or bad, and having to tell your future spouse about your sexual transgressions, Should They Ask (that's important - read it again if you need to) is part of that.
If you don't ask, or think your fiance has no right to ask . . . well, you're wrong . . . and incredibly naive . . . for the reasons I stated above (and which, by they way, you mostly agree with).
IF people have a problem with that . . . well, they should keep their underwear on.
And if they didn't . . . well, repent!
Repentance is awesome!
But you have no right to expect that post-repentance your sexual transgressions will mean nothing to the person who wishes you had waited for them.
It's like STDs and the HPV vaccine . . . no need to worry about either if you save yourself for marriage.
You know, the way God said to.
- Bro Jo
I did not mean that they shouldn't know, but it should not make them undateable. We are all guilty of making mistakes in the past, especially those who are converts. Should a convert be undateable just because before they learned about the church they had lived the way the world lives and had sex? (think of the movie Charlie) Also, if they did not receive a testimony until after they made mistakes should they be punished and undateable for forever?
The question wasn't should they discuss past relationships and sexual transgressions, but if they should date someone who has. Obviously you shouldn't have sex before marriage, but If the person has fully repented and is now living the gospel to the fullest then I don't think the past transgression should be a reason to not date them. It's just is a topic that would have to be discussed more as the couple gets more serious.
I agree with all of that . . . as stated in the original response, except for one thing: a person can accept someone's repentance and have faith in the atonement and love them in every sincere way . . . and still not want to marry (or date) them because of past transgressions, and if we "judge" them for that opinion we are guilty of the very "judgment" we're accusing them of.
If a guy writes me and says "now that I know she was a prostitute, even though she's disease free, I'm just not attracted to her anymore; plus I can't imagine ever wanting to explain her past behavior to our children if they found out"; or if a girl writes me and says "I know he's repented, and I'm sure the Lord has forgiven him, but now every time I look at him I think of what he did with my friend and my other friend and my other friend, and I can't imagine not being worried that he'll compare me to them or picture them when he's with me" then I will not only understand those feelings, I'll think they're making the right decision by not marrying that person, and I'll not think any less of them or question their faith because of how they feel.
Some people will be bothered by past sins, and some will not; so long as they treat others the way Christ would, I understand that.
We need to remember that there's a chasm between "loving a fellow human being" and "choosing to spend Time and All Eternity" with them.
I think that's real. And I think it's fair.
I may "forgive" the repentant repeat sex offender . . . but I'm an idiot if I let him be alone with my daughter.
I hope that makes sense.
- Bro Jo
This whole issue is the reason I don't think I will get married. When I was younger and much more naive I started dating someone a few years older who was a convert to the church, had a child and was clearly 'experienced', to be honest it did bother me that he had has sex even though I knew he was not that person anymore and had repented or so he said. I was led down paths I never would have imagined myself going down. I gave him my virtue, even if it was often forcefully taken, even though it was a manipulative and abusive relationship it still happened and I didn't stop it. I can never get back what was given. I went through the repentance process and feel my relationship with my Heavenly Father is better than ever. I have had plenty of time to put it all to rest but now I am faced with this question. I am now in a place spiritually and emotionally where dating could happen and yet I don't feel I will ever marry because how can I expect a worthy priesthood holder to take me to the temple and not judge me and love me despite my past? I had a problem with being in a relationship with someone 'experienced' so totally understand why someone would have the same problem with me! I am not the person I was when all of that happened, I have grown and learnt so much and I know the saviours atonement is infinite and I am so grateful for it's affect on my life! I know Heavenly Father loves me and has forgiven me but I am not so sure my future husband will. My parents say it is not necessary to tell him because it is in the past and is forgotten but I would want to be honest but with that comes a great fear of rejection and judgement. Is there hope?
Dear Anon,
Of course there's hope!
Your prior sins should have no bearing on whether or not you get married at all . . . not even on Eternal Marriage.
Will they be a reason that SOME choose not to marry you?
Maybe.
But I submit to you that if that's the case (or perhaps better put, "the excuse") then we can doubt whether or not that person loved you.
But someone will!
Regardless of what you've done or not done.
The point, as stated before, is that your heart is in the right place NOW.
Stay on the path. Stay worthy.
And trust in God.
- Bro Jo
Post a Comment